The Bitcoin Policy Institute (BPI) has published an analysis of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision’s Prudential Digital Asset Exposure Standard (SCO60).
According to the document, Bitcoin (BTC) has a risk weight of 1,250%, placing it in Group 2b. According to BIS, Group 2b is the “most stringent level of the entire global capital framework” in which assets can be placed.
For BIS, This treatment is not an objective risk assessmentHowever, this is a “regulatory judgment regarding Bitcoin disguised by the term prudential regulation.” Conor Brown, head of strategy at BIS and author of the analysis, says these regulations are acting invisibly on the market’s biggest digital currencies, disrupting their adoption.
“Dark banking rules are quietly strangling Bitcoin adoption,” Brown said, adding that the analysis shows how Basel standards penalize digital currency financial services and how U.S. regulators can correct this “double standard.”
The BIS report identifies this measure as a “category error” and claims it applies a tool designed for opaque financial instruments and ineligible securitization tranches. Achieve transparent assets without counterparty risk.
According to Brown, a risk weight of 1,250% multiplied by a minimum capital ratio of 8% gives a capital requirement of 100% of the exposure, or $1. This means that the bank has decided to hold $100 million worth of Bitcoin. In addition, more than 100 million capital must be reserved. For positions that do not generate returns by themselves.
“Regardless of any reasonable impediment of any kind, such a fact functionally amounts to a capital deduction; the business case for Bitcoin intermediation by regulated banks is significantly undermined, if not completely eliminated,” the document claims. And if we add capital buffers and internal targets, the effective capital requirement is There is a possibility that it will exceed the total cost of the exhibition.
The following graph shows the Basel Committee’s standardized risk weights by asset class.
What do these rules mean for the Bitcoin market?
In his analysis, Brown warns that the regulations imposed by Basel are widening the gap between demand and demand for regulated services. Banking system capacity To feed them.
Recall that currently around 150 companies have around 1.1 million Bitcoins in their treasury. Estimated value is $78 billion. Tracking sites such as BitcoinTreasuries contrast this figure, however, noting that 193 publicly traded companies have accumulated 1.13 BTC this Tuesday, worth US$72.5 billion at market prices on February 24th.
Among these companies are Strategy and MARA Holdings, which stand out by holding 717,200 BTC and 55,250 BTC, respectively. As reported by CriptoNoticias, the Bitcoin vault trend is growing globally, with public and private companies, organizations, investment funds, and governments focusing on accumulating BTC as a strategic reserve asset. In fact, Latin America is believed to become the benchmark for Bitcoin government bonds.
This sets up a scenario where as a BTC accumulation entity grows, its requirements for storage, lending, and treasury management services will increase. According to Mr. Brown’s recollections, the service: Banks cannot provide profitable services Under this framework.
Similarly, when bank intermediation becomes unprofitable due to the capital framework; Digital currency services affected And activity moves outside of traditional systems to less regulated channels and platforms.
BIS analysts say this will force users to rely on infrastructure with fewer consumer protections. Repeating patterns that caused collapse in the past outside of a regulated environment.
Unlike gold, Brown emphasizes that it has a 0% risk weight because it is an asset with no issuer or credit risk. Bitcoin is treated as the highest risk asset He questioned this, even though they share the same structural characteristics as precious metals: scarcity and lack of credit risk.
Three key steps to improve the relationship between banks and Bitcoin
Considering this scenario, BIS recommends structural reforms U.S. regulators should take the lead, especially following the Basel Committee’s decision in November 2025 to conduct a targeted review of these standards. The proposal is divided into three temporary phases.
- In the short term, it is proposed to clarify that pure custody must be capitalized under an operational risk framework and provide supervisory measures for limited Bitcoin intermediaries.
- In the medium term, BIS proposes to Basel that the 1,250% fixed weight be replaced by a market risk-based approach (FRTB) and operational risk addition. Furthermore, we replace the binary concentration limit with a stepwise scale.
- Finally, the long-term goal is to create a category of “non-issuer digital products” where capital is determined by measurable risk aspects such as volatility and liquidity rather than technical labels.
In general, this BIS proposal aims to improve the banking system. Stop treating Bitcoin as the most risky asset We then begin valuations based on standard financial rules. This fact would eliminate the obstacles that currently prevent many banks (especially smaller banks) from offering services using this digital currency.
In practical terms, this would allow banks to advantageously hold and trade Bitcoin without tying up disproportionate capital reserves. Easier to use for companies and citizens alike access to regulated and secure financial services; Rather than being forced to use a platform outside of the banking system.
BIS aims to pass Bitcoin by basing its capital requirements on real, measurable risks such as volatility, rather than technical labels. Officially integrated as a digital commodity similar to gold within the global financial infrastructure.
Bitcoin adoption continues despite Basel
Despite the barriers imposed by the Basel Committee’s SCO60 standards (which BIS highlights in its report), integrating Bitcoin into the traditional financial sector is noteworthy. It is showing signs of resilience.
major bank They explore and use digital assets. These companies have been driven by a combination of competitive pressures, sustained demand from customers, and the search for new routes to profitability and technological evolution.
Prominent examples include banks such as BNY Mellon in the US, which stores assets in exchange-traded funds, and BBVA in Europe, which offers the buying and selling of digital assets. Germany’s DZ Bank offers cryptocurrency trading and custody services, while France’s Société Générale has launched its own Bitcoin and cryptocurrency platform.
This competitive pressure and continued customer demand Rules try to prevent participationin an attempt to “squeeze” the process, recruitment is driven by the force of facts.
Therefore, the Basel Committee itself is showing signs of openness, announcing a review of its standards to adapt to the market in November 2025. This willingness to relax the rules Questions raised in BIS reportconfirms that market pressures are actually forcing regulators to reconsider frameworks that have been swamped by institutional realities.
Connor Brown’s analysis concludes that Bitcoin is an asset Volatility and liquidity risks are fully measurable And now you can manage it through your existing health framework.
For the head of the Bitcoin Policy Institute, the key is for regulators to abandon regulatory judgment and start applying standards of technical objectivity. The idea is to allow banking systems to capture value in digital currencies, which are already an integral part of modern corporate finance.
(Tag translation) Banks and insurance
